Howard the Duck showed boobs in the first 5 minutes. I kept watching for a second pair. Don't judge me, I was 7 when it came out. Those glorious tits made that the best movie I had ever seen.
After hearing "Biff's Song, I can absolutely understand why he didn't show up for the Anniversary. He's probably been asked those questions for the last 25 years. That was funny.
I seem to be the only guy I know who thought the second one was the best. I just loved that version of the future. I don't wanna fuck my Mom, I wanted to fuck his Mom.
It appealed to multiple generations, with the different settings, music, styles. It had a variety of strong themes of sci-fi, romance, comedy, action. It was a unique story. It had Alex P. Keaton and Reverend Jim. It was both larger than life and down to earth. It's hard to quantify why it did so well. A hollywood producer could go out and make a movie with all the aspects I described, and it might bomb. Sometimes you just capture lightning in a....flux capacitor.
I think the story is just more relatable on a mass scale than those other movies. Something about being able to interact with your parents when they were your age clicks on a more personal level than a bull whip toting archeologist or proton blasting ghost exterminators. There are the nostalgia aspects of the film, reliving 80s memories and recreating the 50's, but that is just part of an over all well crafted film. It is a pure movie's movie and executed about as well as a film can get.
I know what it did for the career of Michael J Fox and Christopher Lloyd, but for Tom Wilson? It probably only meant some one-dimensional roles as a comic bully, and a bunch of annoying questions, as his song so humorously stated. I wrote groundbreaking OR exceptional in some way (even a single performance or scene) OR great, none of which it was. In terms of other action comedies from that same era (within 5 years)? There are quite a few that I consider even better than "Back to the Future"; Ghostbusters, The Blues Brothers, Clue, Beverly Hills Cop, 48 Hours, Midnight Run (a real masterpiece), The Naked Gun, even Tango and Cash. The first four are quite similar in style to "Back to the Future", and the first three funnier, more exciting, and original. Again, I'm not disputing that "Back to the Future" was a very good movie. But why the fandom for this picture and not some of the other ones listed above, for instance? I can buy "nostalgia". And probably "inoffensive family comedy that was actually really good, funny". Beyond that, I'm not sure. What does this mean? Better than Terminator 1 and 2, among others? Or Groundhog Day, Army of Darkness, Donnie Darko, and 12 Monkeys? I'm not even listing any lesser known or foreign films there.
A "movie's movie" to me is a film, like this, that's concept is perfectly fitted for and executed perfectly on film. It's pure popcorn munching fun. Not that the concept couldnt work well in another medium, I'd say a movie like Indiana Jones was done just as well on screen but also could have been a pulp novel series as well.
KIMASTER: Why the nostalgia for Back to the Future but not the others? I think it's because Marty Mc Fly is a teenager. All the movies you listed above are good movies, but are about adults. I watched BttF when I was in my teens, and could relate to the character. I couldn't relate to traveling blues musicians, or cops. They were entertaining, but I could imagine myself doing the things Marty Mc Fly did.
I guess I don't really count T1 & 2 as "time travel" movies, ditto for Groundhog Day (which I also love, but BTTF is a better film regardless). Army of Darkness is great fun but don';t forget it's also campy tongue-and-cheek. Donnie Darko isn't even that good of a movie, just very serpentine all building up to truly shitty and pointless conclusion (the classic "Shaggy Dog Joke", which I despise when they put them in movies). 12 Monkeys I liked, but I hate Terry Gilliam's constant pressed-in-your-face direction he does with every single movie he's made. So to answer you question, BTTF is not as good as the original Terminator, but better than any other film you mentioned. It has that gee-whiz innocence of classic saturday matinee serial movies, it's frantic, funny, exciting, cast to perfection and has a great climax. Plus, Huey Lewis. That seals the deal. GET. YER DAMN. HANDS. OFF. HER.
It's just plain charming. Michael J. Fox was charming, Lea Thompson was charming, Christopher Lloyd was charming, the story was charming. It's innocent, cross generational, fun and whimsical. It's not something you can intellectualize. Butthead.
But the naysayers want to argue a qualitative debate demanding a quantitative answer. "Darth Vader came down from the planet Vulcan last night and told me if I didn't ask Lorraine to the dance, he'd melt my brain"
I do not think those words mean what you think they mean. Sorry to interrupt your circle-jerk chat thread by attempting rational discussion.
Some things defy rational explanation. I don't think it's possible to definitively, rationally come to any sort of conclusion on what makes so many people love a certain thing. It is an emotional reaction, therefore, highly subjective. I love Ghost Busters, The Blues Brothers, Beverly Hills Cop, at least as much as BTTF, though I wouldn't necessarily argue that one was better over the other, though I totally disagree with Tango and Cash. That movie sucked.
What did it do for Tom Wislon? Seriously? He would have NO career without it. Half of his stand up routine deals with annoying people bothering him about being Biff. He was in all three films so I'm sure number three was a pretty big pay day. Does he owe anything? No but when you do not show up for reunions it makes you look bad. Judd Nelson not showing up for The Breakfast Club reunion rings a bell. I can understand actors being upset and annoyed about things like this but if they are not grateful then they really are assholes. Do you really think Tom Wilson would have made it in any other venue? Just for shit's and giggles here are the top grossing films of 1985. <a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_in_film" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_in_film</a> Pretending that all the films were made around the same time I doubt that Wilson had to turn down Steve Guttenbergs role in Cocoon or one of the supporting roles in Witness to be Biff in Back to The Future. There is no doubt in my mind that it could be ungodly annoying sometimes but I'm also sure he made a boat load of money being that one character. Does he owe them anything? No but he looks like a poor sport not showing up for things like this.
Hey c'mon, Tom Wilson went on to a supporting role in the massive cinematic achievement, culture defining hit Camp Nowhere. (Then again, Christopher Lloyd did too...)
I plan on watching two of the three movies this evening. I will be posting a critique of them in this thread. Spoiler, I plan on having nothing negative to say.
Alright...so the answer is nostalgia and a high school main character audiences could relate to. I guess family friendly comedies, when they end up being as good as "Back to the Future", spawn a cult following somewhat disproportional to their quality. It helps that the film is extremely rewatchable and quotable. I understand now, although I find it funny most people who claim it's one of their favorites couldn't give a more cogent reason than "I JUST LIKE IT, GODDAMN IT!". If you love it so much, shouldn't you have more to say? Oh, and what "career" has Tom Wilson had subsequent to that trilogy? Virtually all the other main actors in the franchise had prominent roles after that trilogy, but him? Take a gander at his IMDB page He makes a living doing voices for video games and children's animated TV series, with the occasional incredibly minor role in a small-time live action TV series. He hasn't had a role of any kind in a movie since 1998, and hasn't had a role in a quality film that wasn't direct-to-video since 1993. (A microscopic role in "Blood in, Blood Out") As for "big pay day", that's just wild conjecture. Considering that Crispin Glover, a vastly more famous star than Wilson, with a larger role in the original, was simply fired by Zemeckis for wanting $1 million for the sequel, I doubt he made it rich from the trilogy. And I'm asking you why. You seem to believe it's because he's filthy rich and that he owes "Back to the Future" for his "career", neither of which appears to be solid fact.